Fiscal impact reports (FIRs) are prepared by the Legislative Finance Committee (LFC) for standing finance
committees of the Legislature. LFC does not assume responsibility for the accuracy of these reports if they
are used for other purposes.
F I S C A L I M P A C T R E P O R T
SPONSOR Senate Education Committee
LAST UPDATED
ORIGINAL DATE 03/11/2025
SHORT TITLE Protection of School Library Materials Act
BILL
NUMBER
CS/Senate Bill
552/SECS
ANALYST Chilton
ESTIMATED ADDITIONAL OPERATING BUDGET IMPACT*
(dollars in thousands)
Agency/Program
FY25 FY26 FY27
3 Year
Total Cost
Recurring or
Nonrecurring
Fund
Affected
No fiscal impact No fiscal impact No fiscal impact
No fiscal
impact
Parentheses ( ) indicate expenditure decreases.
*Amounts reflect most recent analysis of this legislation.
Relate to House Bill 27
Conflicts with House Bill 558
Sources of Information
LFC Files
Agency Analysis Received From
Public Education Department (PED) Department of Cultural Affairs (DCA) New Mexico Attorney General (NMAG) Agency Analysis was Solicited but Not Received From
Regional Education Cooperatives (RECA) Albuquerque Public Schools (APS) Because of the short timeframe between the introduction of this bill and its first hearing, LFC has yet to receive analysis from state, education, or judicial agencies. This analysis could be updated
if that analysis is received.
SUMMARY
Synopsis of SEC Substitute for Senate Bill 552
The Senate Education Committee substitute for Senate Bill 552 (SB552) would limit
withdrawals of materials from public school and public charter school libraries and would
establish procedures to be followed in case of such withdrawals being thought to be necessary. It
would give school library staff members immunity from prosecution for refusing to remove
materials prior to the procedures being followed.
CS/Senate Bill 552/SECS – Page 2
Section 1 names the act; Section 2 establishes definitions. It defines “library resource” as
including not only books, magazines and newspapers, but also databases and other online or
video material, microfiche and microfilms, library programs and exhibits.
Section 3 requires that each school board and charter school governing body establish written
policies for library resource acquisition, retention, and display and for reconsideration of library
resources. The Public Education Department (PED) would approve the policies if they comply
with Sections 4 and 5.
Section 4 requires that written policies on acquisition and retention of library resources comply
with the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and protect against harassment and
discrimination of individuals or groups, especially those of protected classes.
Section 5 would allow removal of materials from a library’s permanent collection only if
permitted through the procedures established and reviewed by PED; the reconsideration policies
must be available to the public. Reconsideration could be considered regarding a given library
resource only once every two years, and only upon the request of a parent of a student at the
given school. The public school library could not remove a library resource as a result of a
reconsideration request until completion of review of the material.
Section 6 absolves a public school library staff member from any type of retaliation for not
removing a library resource item before the review of that material was completed.
The effective date of this bill is July 1, 2025.
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS
There is no appropriation in Senate Bill 552. No fiscal impact is anticipated, other than PED
having to approve policies regarding library resource acquisition and removal.
SIGNIFICANT ISSUES
The American Library Association (ALA) maintains statistics on book-banning efforts around
the country. Regarding the first eight months of 2024, ALA states:
Between January 1 and August 31, 2024, ALA’s Office for Intellectual Freedom tracked
414 attempts to censor library materials and services. In those cases, 1,128 unique titles
were challenged. In the same reporting period last year, ALA tracked 695 attempts with
1,915 unique titles challenged. Though the number of reports to date has declined in
2024, the number of documented attempts to censor books continues to far exceed the
numbers prior to 2020. Additionally, instances of soft censorship, where books are
purchased but placed in restricted areas, not used in library displays, or otherwise hidden
or kept off limits due to fear of challenges illustrate the impact of organized censorship
campaigns on students’ and readers’ freedom to read. In some circumstances, books have
been preemptively excluded from library collections, taken off the shelves before they are
banned, or not purchased for library collections in the first place.
PED points to a compilation of studies showing that school libraries can make a “crucial
contribution” to student achievement. Further, PED comments that passage of this bill and/or CS/Senate Bill 552/SECS – Page 3
House Bill 27 would “prevent ideologically based book bans in public libraries….thereby
safeguarding against the removal of materials due to partisan or doctrinal disapproval.”
The New Mexico Attorney General notes that:
SB552 may raise First Amendment concerns. However, it is noteworthy that the Act is
likely consistent with Supreme Court precedent Board of Education, Island Trees Union
Free School District No. 26 v. Pico, 457 U.S. 853 (1982), wherein the Supreme Court’s
plurality opinion suggests that school boards may not remove books from libraries simply
due to disapproval of ideas within them.
CONFLICT, DUPLICATION, COMPANIONSHIP, RELATIONSHIP
Relates to House Bill 27, Librarian Protection Act, removing state funding if libraries remove
library resources for discriminatory purposes.
Conflicts in part with House Bill 558, No Sexually Explicit Material in Schools.
TECHNICAL ISSUES
NMAG lists two concerns:
Section 2, part (B), lines 9-13. This is where SB 552 defines “library staff member”. It
generally captures any teacher or personnel affiliated with a school library. However, it
may be prudent to include approved school library volunteers in the definition.
Section 5 outlines the requirements for a school’s reconsideration policy. It does not,
however, provide any direction as to which personnel are tasked with receiving
reconsideration requests (Section 5(C)) or making final determinations of reconsideration
reviews (Section 5(E)). Nor does it contain uniform criteria or guidelines for personnel to
use in evaluating a library resource reconsideration request. There are also no time frame
or deadline requirements for how long a reconsideration request may take to be reviewed.
PED has three additional recommendations:
The bill contains a circular reference between Sections 3 and 5. Section 3.B of the bill
requires a written policy for the reconsideration of a library resource that complies with
the provisions of Section 5 of the act. Section 5.A requires that a public school library
only remove a resource from its permanent collection if it has been reviewed in
accordance with an applicable reconsideration policy established pursuant to Section 3 of
the act, when it is this section that establishes the policy. It would be better for Section
5.A. to read, “A public school library may remove a library resource from its permanent
collection only if that resource has been reviewed in accordance with the applicable
reconsideration policy established “pursuant to this section.”
While the proposed Protection of School Library Materials Act and the current School
Library Material Act address somewhat distinct issues with regard to school library
materials, as noted above, it may be better for the two acts to be merged, rather than be
created as two separate acts.
PED would be required to collect and approve school district and charter school library
material policies between July 1, 2025, and September 1, 2025. The bill would not
provide for the PED to enforce the Protection of School Library Material Act
CS/Senate Bill 552/SECS – Page 4
WHAT WILL BE THE CONSEQUENCES OF NOT ENACTING THIS BILL
As noted by DCA, “School libraries may operate without an established collection development
and maintenance policy. Individuals and groups who are not parents of current students will
continue to be able to challenge school library materials.”
LAC/hj